• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

REDDI Tube DI Mega-thread-III

#1,541
beans-on-toast said:
As I recall, that thread used an early model REDDI to reverse engineer. There have been revisions, I don't know if any related to the output transformer.

I wonder how close they got the the OPT in the clone by just taking measurements and not unwinding one and examining the construction and the materials. A lot goes into the OPT design and I imagine that A-Designs must have gone through a lot of listening tests with many transformer revisions, comparing one to another to get it sounding just right. Minute changes in the transformer design amd construction make a difference in the sonic character and performance.

Secondly, as Jimmy was saying, a professional wants a DI with the proper regulatory approvals. You don't want liability issues with a piece of your gear. This is expensive and I doubt that the cloned product has this. Getting the approvals for this product is an expensive and time consuming process. One big reason to choose the REDDI.
Click to expand...

I think the guy who designed the transformers has a good grasp on what makes a good transformer and my sense of it is that he designed his own solution based on the parameters of the circuit rather than attempting to recreate the original transformer.

There are lots of things in the boutique audio world that have no regulatory approvals of any kind, not even a hipot test. It's a big barrier to entry into the market and probably is something that reputable outfits like A-Designs should be pointing out in their advertising.

I think it's fundamentally dishonourable to reverse-engineer a product and market the clone at a much reduced price.
 
#1,543
Mark Reccord said:
I think the guy who designed the transformers has a good grasp on what makes a good transformer and my sense of it is that he designed his own solution based on the parameters of the circuit rather than attempting to recreate the original transformer.

There are lots of things in the boutique audio world that have no regulatory approvals of any kind, not even a hipot test. It's a big barrier to entry into the market and probably is something that reputable outfits like A-Designs should be pointing out in their advertising.

I think it's fundamentally dishonourable to reverse-engineer a product and market the clone at a much reduced price.
Click to expand...

CJ did seem to design the transformer based on readings that others had taken. But this is a far cry from ordering a number of samples, trying different materials, listening, tweaking the design, and iterating untill they get it where they want it. This is probably what A-Designs went through as part of their design process. I think that the clone could sonically suffer as a result of how it was designed.

I'm torn when it comes to reverse engineering a product. As you said, it is dishonourable to offer a clone at a lower price. This is part of the buisness. A lot of companies got started buy offering clones and modified versions of Fender amps, for example. Another example is Neve 1073 clones. BAE Audio make an excellent clone of the original 1073 mic preamp using currently manufactured St Ives transformers, they also sell it for less than AMS-Neve does. People even load 500 series BAE products into their Neve consoles. I wouldn't buy a clone of the REDDI, in part because it isn't the same amd it doesn't have certification. I would buy a BAE 1073 though. AMS-Neve has not prevented BAE or all the othe clone companies from s lli g their version of the design. I suppose that if they don't mind, perhaps I shouldn't be bothered by it. The truth is, sales are good for everyone. A lot of people want a genuine Neve and that is what they buy. Others, perfer the clones.

A side note about the Carnhill/St Ives audio transformers that Neve and BAE both use. The modern versions are not the same as the originals. They don't use the same metal formulations because of environmental laws. Same old story that we keep heaing from all transformer manufacturers. The old and new are close in performance but not the same. So nothing will beat a true vintage Neve. But they can come pretty close.
 
#1,544
SteveC said:
I agree, but there are companies that make their living doing just that.
Click to expand...

Sadly, yes.

beans-on-toast said:
CJ did seem to design the transformer based on readings that others had taken. But this is a far cry from ordering a number of samples, trying different materials, listening, tweaking the design, and iterating untill they get it where they want it. This is probably what A-Designs went through as part of their design process. I think that the clone could sonically suffer as a result of how it was designed.

I'm torn when it comes to reverse engineering a product. As you said, it is dishonourable to offer a clone at a lower price. This is part of the buisness. A lot of companies got started buy offering clones and modified versions of Fender amps, for example. Another example is Neve 1073 clones. BAE Audio make an excellent clone of the original 1073 mic preamp using currently manufactured St Ives transformers, they also sell it for less than AMS-Neve does. People even load 500 series BAE products into their Neve consoles. I wouldn't buy a clone of the REDDI, in part because it isn't the same amd it doesn't have certification. I would buy a BAE 1073 though. AMS-Neve has not prevented BAE or all the othe clone companies from s lli g their version of the design. I suppose that if they don't mind, perhaps I shouldn't be bothered by it. The truth is, sales are good for everyone. A lot of people want a genuine Neve and that is what they buy. Others, perfer the clones.

A side note about the Carnhill/St Ives audio transformers that Neve and BAE both use. The modern versions are not the same as the originals. They don't use the same metal formulations because of environmental laws. Same old story that we keep heaing from all transformer manufacturers. The old and new are close in performance but not the same. So nothing will beat a true vintage Neve. But they can come pretty close.
Click to expand...

I was going to post that I think reverse-engineering a non-vintage, current production design is ethically different than cloning vintage gear that is no longer produced by the original manufacturer or even stuff that's been around for so long that the circuits are essentially public domain. That said, I do think the clone culture in audio is a bit out of control, but it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing for sure as there is quite a demand for vintage clones and I guess this is why so many of them exist.

I think that CJ did build a bunch of prototypes before settling on that transformer and I'd bet there was probably some back and forth between him and the ZOD guy outside of the thread. I think he stacks and winds them himself, which is actually pretty freakin' awesome. And I really don't have any issues with a group of DIY-inclined folks reverse-engineering a current design and even building their own clones for personal use. What I do have a problem with (and I'd bet the owners of groupdiy would as well) is using the information gained in a DIY thread on a DIY site to commercialize a clone of a current design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beans-on-toast
#1,545
I doubt that ZOD sales will amount to much. They don't have the marketing and distribution network that A-Designs has. At the same time, every product is designed with cost constraints. It is possible that the ZOD transformer is better. Consumers will decide.

With a different output transformer, I wonder if A-Designs would have a legal case that is worth perusing. It costs a lot to defend your products. It is based on the original design but is not a clone.
 
#1,546
beans-on-toast said:
I doubt that ZOD sales will amount to much. They don't have the marketing and distribution network that A-Designs has. At the same time, every product is designed with cost constraints. It is possible that the ZOD transformer is better. Consumers will decide.

With a different output transformer, I wonder if A-Designs would have a legal case that is worth perusing. It costs a lot to defend your products. It is based on the original design but is not a clone.
Click to expand...
Might be tough. Peter didn't invent the tube DI with the large output transformer to begin with. He just perfected it and made it something people would actually buy :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: beans-on-toast and sevenyearsdown
#1,547
beans-on-toast said:
I doubt that ZOD sales will amount to much. They don't have the marketing and distribution network that A-Designs has. At the same time, every product is designed with cost constraints. It is possible that the ZOD transformer is better. Consumers will decide.

With a different output transformer, I wonder if A-Designs would have a legal case that is worth perusing. It costs a lot to defend your products. It is based on the original design but is not a clone.
Click to expand...

JimmyM said:
Might be tough. Peter didn't invent the tube DI with the large output transformer to begin with. He just perfected it and made it something people would actually buy :D
Click to expand...

I doubt there's any reasonable legal recourse. The circuits in the REDDI are 1930s technology and have been used in a lot of other places so I doubt they could even remotely considered proprietary. PCB layouts can be copyrighted but I doubt the ZOD's are identical anyway. That said, there's a pretty obvious trail of the reverse engineering of the REDDI with intent to introduce a competing product that is essentially a ripoff on that site. If you went inside a ZOD and found that every part value was identical to that in the REDDI save for the OT (as has been reported by svtb15), you might be able to make a case. It would be very unlikely that you'd come up with an exact replica of another circuit including power supply rectifiers and voltage regulators in a vacuum even if the general topology and tube selection was the same. Probably not worth pursuing though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JimmyM
#1,548
People will tone chase forever... I quit about 11 years ago when i got my 1st REDDI which i use 6 days a week,,I fall short in many ways.. ,
But , Imagine if they spent as much time playing their bass and chasing their reading abilities and skills. Instead of posting about tone chasing and bickering all day and about whose proverbial dad could beat up the others guys dad ,We would all be a Victor Wooten / Jaco clones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mwbonsall
#1,549
svtb15 said:
People will tone chase forever... I quit about 11 years ago when i got my 1st REDDI which i use 6 days a week,,I fall short in many ways.. ,
But , Imagine if they spent as much time playing their bass and chasing their reading abilities and skills. Instead of posting about tone chasing and bickering all day and about whose proverbial dad could beat up the others guys dad ,We would all be a Victor Wooten / Jaco clones.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of us have much room to talk in that regard :D But I AM making a little more time for practice these days.
 
#1,550
svtb15 said:
People will tone chase forever... I quit about 11 years ago when i got my 1st REDDI which i use 6 days a week,,I fall short in many ways.. ,
But , Imagine if they spent as much time playing their bass and chasing their reading abilities and skills. Instead of posting about tone chasing and bickering all day and about whose proverbial dad could beat up the others guys dad ,We would all be a Victor Wooten / Jaco clones.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. But you can't argue about that stuff on a forum. That's no fun. :cool:
My only defense is that I do this at work where it's hard for me to really practice, so I do my bickering between classes and lessons. When I'm home, my kids usually do a good job of keeping me from practice. My tone chasing is mostly done in cyberspace comparing this to that and talking myself in and out of stuff. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mwbonsall, svtb15 and Dave Hill
#1,556
I'm on the fence about whether to buy a REDDI new or used. I obviously prefer the price of used but am always a bit reluctant when it comes to used electronics (just because I can't necessarily spot any problems/potential problems the way I can with, say, a bass - save for the bass' electronics of course :D). Any thoughts?
 
#1,557
bass12 said:
I'm on the fence about whether to buy a REDDI new or used. I obviously prefer the price of used but am always a bit reluctant when it comes to used electronics (just because I can't necessarily spot any problems/potential problems the way I can with, say, a bass - save for the bass' electronics of course :D). Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
That's always a gamble. I bought mine used from Sweetwater (returned by original buyer) and it's been fine. Thought I had an issue with it when I first got it but I was mistaken. Peter Montessi called and worked with me directly to do some remote testing to determine if the unit was operating as it should. Great customer service.

10406520_1286704721344806_1932866154311158825_n.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: svtb15 and bass12
#1,559
bass12 said:
I'm on the fence about whether to buy a REDDI new or used. I obviously prefer the price of used but am always a bit reluctant when it comes to used electronics (just because I can't necessarily spot any problems/potential problems the way I can with, say, a bass - save for the bass' electronics of course :D). Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

There was a revision at some point. I would want the latest. Just because it is the latest. The changes made in the revision were described by Peter.

A new one comes with a warranty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bass12

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back